Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Question on Applied Ballistics App and Coriolis
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="KYpatriot" data-source="post: 1187735" data-attributes="member: 48028"><p>Phorwath I think you're dead on about the angle of fire influence on the Coriolis correction being a result of time of flight. I was an aero engineering major but to be honest my recollection of the physics on this subject arent sharp enough to be of much help. Without question of course the main factor in coriolis is time of flight, and angle of fire does affect that. </p><p></p><p>I still think, based on my own experience, that the solvers over correct for it. But I havent used the "better" solvers out there only the apps. The apps so far have been sufficient for me to get actual dope for my rifles. Again, it could also be that something in my technique offsets those inputs. I think that is part of the problem. Anytime you try to get data in a low "signal to noise" environment it is difficult to do if you can't control all the variables with absolute precision. Errors stack, or cancel, and the whole thing is never exactly repeatable because each day is different, each shot is different, and can lead to faulty conclusions about what was primary when we miss. I can zero my rifle, hand it to you, and for you it probably wont be zeroed. That alone ought to tell us something right there. </p><p></p><p>It would be interesting to find a mine somewhere with a thousand yard shaft, turn off the ventilation for a few minutes and shoot a thousand yard group underground with zero wind from a machine rest and see if our solvers match real world, clean data on coriolis and spin drift. </p><p></p><p>In the end, hits on target are what matter. Solvers give us a solution to get us close, but real world data from a logbook compiled over time are the real answer to first and second round hits, because everything from zero error, scope click tolerance, shooter technique, and all the internal and external ballistic inputs are all rolled in because they are actual recorded shots. For whatever reason, that data tells me that I can and should ignore coriolis because my app calls too much correction...for my setup that is. For many reasons that can and probably will be different for everyone, and even for me if I do turn it on, I probably wouldnt notice except in the absolute best conditions. </p><p></p><p>I know one thing, if I could change anything about my shooting it would be better wind calls. The man who invents a device that Measures an averaged wind vector along a particular line of sight will have advanced the science of long range shooting as much as the first rifled barrel! </p><p></p><p>Are boundary layer effects accounted for when calculating coriolis? In other words is the solver taking into account that the bullet in flight is not flying through a vacuum completely free of earths influence as it rotates, but is in fact flying through an air mass getting drug around with the rotation, at least at the altitudes bullets are flying at...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KYpatriot, post: 1187735, member: 48028"] Phorwath I think you're dead on about the angle of fire influence on the Coriolis correction being a result of time of flight. I was an aero engineering major but to be honest my recollection of the physics on this subject arent sharp enough to be of much help. Without question of course the main factor in coriolis is time of flight, and angle of fire does affect that. I still think, based on my own experience, that the solvers over correct for it. But I havent used the "better" solvers out there only the apps. The apps so far have been sufficient for me to get actual dope for my rifles. Again, it could also be that something in my technique offsets those inputs. I think that is part of the problem. Anytime you try to get data in a low "signal to noise" environment it is difficult to do if you can't control all the variables with absolute precision. Errors stack, or cancel, and the whole thing is never exactly repeatable because each day is different, each shot is different, and can lead to faulty conclusions about what was primary when we miss. I can zero my rifle, hand it to you, and for you it probably wont be zeroed. That alone ought to tell us something right there. It would be interesting to find a mine somewhere with a thousand yard shaft, turn off the ventilation for a few minutes and shoot a thousand yard group underground with zero wind from a machine rest and see if our solvers match real world, clean data on coriolis and spin drift. In the end, hits on target are what matter. Solvers give us a solution to get us close, but real world data from a logbook compiled over time are the real answer to first and second round hits, because everything from zero error, scope click tolerance, shooter technique, and all the internal and external ballistic inputs are all rolled in because they are actual recorded shots. For whatever reason, that data tells me that I can and should ignore coriolis because my app calls too much correction...for my setup that is. For many reasons that can and probably will be different for everyone, and even for me if I do turn it on, I probably wouldnt notice except in the absolute best conditions. I know one thing, if I could change anything about my shooting it would be better wind calls. The man who invents a device that Measures an averaged wind vector along a particular line of sight will have advanced the science of long range shooting as much as the first rifled barrel! Are boundary layer effects accounted for when calculating coriolis? In other words is the solver taking into account that the bullet in flight is not flying through a vacuum completely free of earths influence as it rotates, but is in fact flying through an air mass getting drug around with the rotation, at least at the altitudes bullets are flying at... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Question on Applied Ballistics App and Coriolis
Top